Who signed the Mei to the piece?

[Guest Simon R]

10 hours ago, Gimmick said:I will gladly give up on you. Consider this stopping.

10 hours ago, Gimmick said:

"Members of NMB, you have been warned!"

 

"If you guys are content with your "expertise", then certainly I am too. I will gladly give up on you. Consider this stopping."

Foolishly ignoring my late mother's wise advice to "never feed a cockwomble", I would like to point out that the definition of 'stopping' does not include injecting fresh bile into old comments by using the 'edit' function.

[Guest Simon R]

1 hour ago, Gakusee said:

Some interesting quotes from literature, which shed some light on mei. 

 

• Nihonto Koza (Afu translation) Koto part I p4, Honma Junji:

In reference to old mei (Heian and Early Kamakura swords), he writes: 'One point which must especially be written about is the mei style. The reason that it is large is because it was made to resemble the writing style of Wei, Shin, and the Six Dynasties of China, and these are extremely interesting when viewed as knowledge for the judging of calligraphy. Come to think of it, this mei style is not something that is seen only in KYOMONO, the mei style that is seen in KO-BIZEN and other works of this same period is about the same. All of them, while appearing old and unskilled, have a certain character and an appearance of antiquity.'
Not only did they know what they signed, they emulated Sino- calligraphy and culture.

 

• Nihon Koto Shi (M Sesko translation), p 22 (e-version):

Honma Junji writes: 'Entering the Japanese Sword Age, it became a custom that swordsmiths signed their smith names on the nakago, but there is no extant work of the Shōsō´in Depository that has a smith’s name inscribed on the nakago. There are two swords that have characters on the blade amongst 100 tachi of the depository. These characters are inscriptions that praise the swords, but are not swordsmith’s names. Two treasure swords with kinzōgan are registered in ‘Shutsuzō-chō’ (出倉帳, a list of swords coming both in and out of the collection). There are notes about the two swords on the list, “Jiden” (次田) and “Daishō Saku” (大小作) (there is a record on the list that the swords were taken out of the depository on the 26th day of the twelfth month of Tenpyō-Hōji drei [天平宝字, 759]). Though I have not been able to confirm that they are smith’s names or their titles, it is uncertain whether these inscriptions chiselled on the blade or nakago.
According to a clause included in ‘Taihō-ritsuryō’ (大宝律令, legal codes) that was issued in 701 [AD], swordsmiths were ordered to sign their names on the nakago of their works, therefore, there should have been swords with smith’s names on their nakago in that period. How should we understand the actual fact that there is no extant work with a smith’s name in the sword collection of the Shōsō´in Depository? Possibly tachi categorised as kingin-densō-tachi that were worn by emperors and court nobles, might not be recognised as weapon, therefore, they were not to be subjected to the code. However, musō-tō in ō-dabira style should have smith’s names on the nakago since they are to have been used as weapon. I wonder if the clause of the Taihō-ritsuryō was not practised by swordsmiths and resulted in a mere scrap of paper? Incidentally, the ‘Engi-shiki’ (延喜式) codes issued later orders to officials in charge of swords supplied to the government, to sign their names on the swords, but this did not apply to smith’s names. Meanwhile, swords for sale in the market were still subjected to the clause of the Taihō-ritsuryō codes.'

 

The Shosoin swords being mostly from Nara and earliest Heian period, precede the traditional Japanese swords, yet had inscriptions!

 

The earliest sword school being Yamato, originated in / around monasteries (which were seats of education and knowledge). Same text as above:

'My theory, that the origin of Yamato swords comes from the swords of the Shōsō´in Depository, is as mentioned above and justified from the view point of workmanship and geography. There is no doubt that Yamato smiths had had intimate relationship with temples since the medieval period and supplied the temples, which had many armed monks, with swords. Especially, I am sure that swordsmiths who belonged to big temples such as the Tōdaiji (東大寺) and the Kōfuku-ji (興福寺) enjoyed their special patronage. Referring to the case of Tegai Kanenaga (手掻包永), his school name ‘Tegai’ coincides with the name of a gate of the Tōdaiji and it means smiths of the Tegai school lived near the Tegai Gate (手掻門) of the temple. Incidentally, there is an address called ‘Tegai-chō’ (手掻町) which still exists in the temple town today. Kanenaga is the founder of the Tegai school and was active in the middle of the Kamakura Period. The facts mentioned above prove that the Tegai school had a special relation with the Todaiji.'

 

While speculative, it is likely if the smiths coexisted and co-worked with the erudite priests would have assimilated at least some literacy. 
 

As mentioned in other posts (Reddit referenced article?), the Japanese society was erudite and probably more so that Western societies. Reference from the 3-volume “A History of Japan” by G Sansom, 1st volume in the enclosed photo.  Who in the 9th century elsewhere compiled a list of books available in the country? I need to check some of the great M Eastern and Indian and Chinese civilisations but my conjecture is it will be only very few nations. 
 

And one could go on and on, putting together sufficient evidence that there was ample erudition in their society, the smiths existed/worked mostly in centres of erudition and knowledge (as that was where the clientele was), that their mei are so well studied that experts notice how tiny atari or chisel strokes are made and superimpose on that analysis of patina and ageing et cetera et cetera. It simply requires patience and desire to read books and study….Unfortunately, the world of Nihonto is not one where 5-10 Google searches or 10 clicks of the mouse will produce ready answers or where ChatGPT makes any sense.  One needs to persevere and respectfully and patiently study. 

Thank you, Michael!

 

This is fascinating and highly informative, to say the least!

 

Best regards,

Simon

[Gakusee]

15 hours ago, vajo said:

 

 

And the samurai as we think never exists.

 

Well, it depends on what you mean by that generalisation....The role of bushi, from landowners who had to protect their land to landed gentry to conscripted warriors to codified military caste changed quote a bit over 7-8 centuries! My interpretation of your statement (and apologies if misconstrued) is that actually what you are thinking of samurai probably can be narrowed down to the period 1550-1615 (which is when their behaviour was quite codified and they were the exalted warriors we romanticise about and actually fought and so on). 

Before then, the behaviours were different and they were summoned, trained, equipped more sporadically and differently. 

After that, they just became a military class but lived mostly peacefully.  

So charts such as the pyramidal hierarchy cited above are snapshots at a given point in time and are representative of a certain period. 

[Brian]

9 hours ago, SRDRowson said:

Foolishly ignoring my late mother's wise advice to "never feed a cockwomble", I would like to point out that the definition of 'stopping' does not include injecting fresh bile into old comments by using the 'edit' function.

I just saw that...had a good laugh at being accused of being paid by the shinsa authorities to promote their efforts, and also being bribed by dealers to push their shinsa services. The guy needs mental health help. I decided to ban him, I don't need paranoid, rude and obnoxious troublemakers here. Carry on.

[vajo]

Michael my comment was only on the point of "could read or not" and the education of people and classes in the old Japan.

I think it's total false to took a peoples pyramid and saying the most could not read - finish.

The world isn't that easy. 

 

Old Japan was not the western world. In Europe the most could not read and nobles too. The only ones who could read were monks and clerics und Traders, like the hanse. And some Artisans like painters could read too.

 

my thoughts on Samurai:

The picture is mostly that a Samurai walk the whole day around with his swords, make martial arts, kill people who insult him, drinking sake and wait for the next war.

 

But reality was the most time they work on their grounds.

 

 

[robinalexander]

OK now that the dust is settling.  I would like to ask a simple question in regard to a gimei signature.

 

Is it possible that on occassions, highly rated smiths deliberately altered or changed their mei, even in the most incorrectly obvious way, in order to give a blade gimei status, in circumstances such as....

• On commission for one blade, the smith actually made two and the best was presented...the other, given a gimei mei
• During normal production, a smith found a minor fault(s) with his work and therefore signed, or had it signed, gimei
• Or, he just didn't like it ....so a gimei mei.

Is this a possibility?  It appears there are many blades out there with suspected or obvious gimei mei are still recognised as 'being xxx hundred years old' , ' traditionally made' and 'still a good blade'.

 

Rob

[Brian]

Rob,
My opinion is no. There was never a need to do that, and since they were producing what they considered a religious vocation granted to them, I highly doubt it unless they were deliberately creating fakes for profit, like Kajihei.
Can't see that being an option or any reason why they would do that. When they made 2 of the same sword, the other was sold by them under their name. If a sword was flawed, they generally scrapped it.
As for upper class samurai, they were considered educated, scholarly and studied arts, and other forms of religion etc. They were highly regarded.

[Guest Simon R]

2 hours ago, vajo said:

Michael my comment was only on the point of "could read or not" and the education of people and classes in the old Japan.

I think it's total false to took a peoples pyramid and saying the most could not read - finish.

The world isn't that easy. 

 

Old Japan was not the western world. In Europe the most could not read and nobles too. The only ones who could read were monks and clerics und Traders, like the hanse. And some Artisans like painters could read too.

 

my thoughts on Samurai:

The picture is mostly that a Samurai walk the whole day around with his swords, make martial arts, kill people who insult him, drinking sake and wait for the next war.

 

But reality was the most time they work on their grounds.

 

 

"The picture is mostly that a Samurai walk the whole day around with his swords, make martial arts, kill people who insult him, drinking sake and wait for the next war."

Actually, that's my definition of being an English teacher working in Tokyo. 😉

[Jussi Ekholm]

There have been some very good points in posts to this thread.

 

One thing that I will try to make is the amount of items that Japanese experts will have studied closely in hand is far superior to what 99,9% of us have/will be able to. Now as many might know I do have slight obsession with data gathering, and I will take Bizen Nagamitsu as an example here. In my references I have 203 authenticated signatures of Nagamitsu that I can pull up. I have seen signed (and authenticated) Nagamitsu items with my own eyes but I have never really studied even a single mei in person and close with time, so in reality I do not understand Nagamitsu mei well enough to really comment anything valuable. Therefore I would put my trust in NBTHK or other Japanese experts that have seen, studied and researched dozens and dozens of Nagamitsu mei.

[drbvac]

This entire post is bizarre with all sorts of theories and postulations on many things. The most important point is literacy and the ability to sign ones name with 2 characters is equivalent of a 4 year old writing their initials. It was also pointed out that anyone who can forge one of these blades is certainly enough of a craftsman to chisel their 2 character mei on the nakago. No one writes their name EXACTLY the same time every time they sign anything but there are enough characteristics that are the same to allow someone to determine if they are written by the same person. All that said - I get tired listening to people argueing over topics that they actually believe are correct with no more evidence that they are than as someone else pointed out most beliefs - especially religious ones. For someone who believes something they don't need any proof and for someone who doesn't no proof will ever be enough. That said - this Board is not the place to argue - state your opinion then sit back and see the reactions and learn from them - don't go off on anyone you are not in the same mind with - lifes too short and trust me - in 100 years none of it will matter at all.